Art and Fear -
A good book about the internal and external challenges to making art, along with the rewards.
|
Saturday, 4 April 2015
quote [ TOPEKA, Kan. ? Kansas will become the fifth state to allow its residents to carry concealed firearms without a permit throughout the state.
Republican Gov. Sam Brownback on Thursday signed a bill ending the permit requirement. The change takes effect July 1. The National Rifle Association says Kansas joins Alaska, Arizona, Vermont and Wyoming in having such a policy. The NRA says Montana and Arkansas have concealed carry without a permit, but not everywhere. ] I am staunchly pro-2nd, but this opens a whole bunch of WTF's for me.
Concealed carry requires classroom and practical training to be effective, I.E. When deadly force is an appropriate response, laws regarding self-defense, zero-sum, ect...
Without proper training required by law... there will be a rise of questionable and unlawful shoots; regardless of good intentions by which I think the bill was passed. Criminals will never abide by gun laws, period. So, it's not them that I'm worried about. It's the assholes who think they're BZ enough to strap on a piece and be Lone Wolf McQuaid, but can't be trusted with a toilet, much less a firearm. What the NRA should be doing is putting those donations to good use and holding free (And/or partially State Funded) licensing/CCW classes to make sure those who do intend to conceal carry can get the proper training before taking on the humongous responsibility of being a CCW holder. CCW holders are generally the cream of the crop, willing to financially support their rights with all the proper and consistent training. They are also extremely knowledgable of all appropriate gun laws. This only bodes bad news for gun owners nationwide, if this Pandora's box is opened further...
|
HP Lovekraftwerk said @ 8:14pm GMT on 6th April
Similarly, the 14th Amendment doesn't actually guarantee everyone the right to vote, but we take it as such.
Yet that "right" can be restricted. If I commit a felony, I lose the right to vote. I can't go buy an illegal vote from a shady vote dealer. It's very difficult to vote illegally, even though that really isn't a problem, even statistically, in our electoral system. Even so, there are a great many politicians who seem to think someone exercise the right to vote is an activity that needs a lot of regulation, scrutiny, and (in many cases) disenfranchisement.
It's funny how none of that is applied to gun ownership. I applaud your proposals, but I think we both know they'd never get anywhere, because some "rights" are more equal than others.
HP Lovekraftwerk said @ 4:18pm GMT on 6th April
Similarly, the 14th Amendment doesn't actually guarantee everyone the right to vote, but we take it as such.
Yet that "right" can be restricted. If I commit a felony, I lose the right to vote. I can't go buy an illegal vote from a shady vote dealer. It's very difficult to vote illegally, even though that really isn't a problem, even statistically, in our electoral system. Even so, there are a great many politicians who seem to think someone exercise the right to vote is an activity that needs a lot of regulation, scrutiny, and (in many cases) disenfranchisement.
If I commit a felony and my right to own a gun is restricted... so what? There are loads of ways to get one that few seemed concerned about. The NRA and its allies make sure tracking weapons uses an archaic system of pen and paper, they maintain loopholes where they can, and they ensure that guns are plentiful. Yet the idea of someone voting illegally to swing an election, which is politically about as likely as winning the lottery, is of paramount concern.
It's funny how none of that is applied to gun ownership. I applaud your proposals, but I think we both know they'd never get anywhere, because some "rights" are more equal than others.
<-- Entry / Current Comment
HP Lovekraftwerk said @ 8:14pm GMT on 6th April
Similarly, the 14th Amendment doesn't actually guarantee everyone the right to vote, but we take it as such.
Yet that "right" can be restricted. If I commit a felony, I lose the right to vote. I can't go buy an illegal vote from a shady vote dealer. It's very difficult to vote illegally, even though that really isn't a problem, even statistically, in our electoral system. Even so, there are a great many politicians who seem to think someone exercise the right to vote is an activity that needs a lot of regulation, scrutiny, and (in many cases) disenfranchisement.
If I commit a felony and my right to own a gun is restricted... so what? There are loads of ways to get one that few seemed concerned about. The NRA and its allies make sure tracking weapons uses an archaic system of pen and paper, they maintain loopholes where they can, and they ensure that guns are plentiful. Yet the idea of someone voting illegally to swing an election, which is politically about as likely as winning the lottery, is of paramount concern.
It's funny how none of that is applied to gun ownership. I applaud your proposals, but I think we both know they'd never get anywhere, because some "rights" are more equal than others.
